Karnataka Court October 2006 Judgments

A.V. Kamath S/O Late A. Vittappa Kamath Vs. the Commercial Corporation ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(1)KLJ616; 2007(1)AIRKarR79

N.K. Patil, J.1. The instant Regular Second Appeal arises out of the judgment and decree dated 27th August 2001 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore in R.A.No. 22/2000 dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 4th July 2000 in O.S. No. 127/1994 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Mangalore.2. The instant appeal is filed by the plaintiff-appellant on the basis that, he is the seller of lottery tickets of various states in his shop run under the name and style 'M/s. Ganesh Lottery House'. The fourth defendant - fourth respondent herein - State of Goa sells lottery tickets under the name 'Jai Mathru Bhoomi' and first defendant - first respondent herein is the organizer of the lottery tickets 'Jai Mathru Boomi' of the fourth defendant. The case of the plaintiff - appellant is that he purchases lottery tickets of various states inclusive of 'Jai Mathru Bhoomi' tickets of fourth defendant organized by th...

Dr. K. Aravind, M.B.B.S. M.S., (General Surgery) S/O Sri K. Ganapathy ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the selection list dated 25.07.2006 issued by the 1st respondent-University selecting the 4th respondent for the M.Ch (Urology) Post Graduate Super Speciality Course under the in-service quota for admission to the course. He is also seeking a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to consider the candidature of the petitioner for admission to the Course.2. The brief facts of the case which arc relevant for resolving the controversy raised can be set out as under:The petitioner is a Post Graduate in General Surgery and has been serving at the Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubli, (KIMS) which is an autonomous body coming under the jurisdiction and purview of the Rajiv Gandhi University. Petitioner claims to have joined the services at KIMS in June 2002 as a Lecturer and has been presently serving as Assistant Professor in the said Institute since 02.09.2005. He has put in more than four (4) years of service c...

ishwar Basavanneppa Kolvi Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(2)KarLJ77

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Belgaum District, dated 31-5-2004 dismissing the revision and confirming the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Bailhongal, dated 25-10-2002 wherein the Assistant Commissioner, Bailhongal dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order entering the name of the fourth respondent in the revenue records in respect of land comprised in Sy. No. 19 measuring 15 acres, 18 guntas of Patagundi Village, Gokak Taluk.2. It is the contention of the petitioner that the land belong to the petitioner and the fourth respondent. He had incurred loan which could not be repaid and therefore land was forfeited. Thereafter, in view of the Government order enabling restoration of the land if the amount is paid, fourth respondent made an application for restoration of land and land was restored to the legal heir of the father of the petitioner and the fourth respondent. However, entry was made o...

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. GaisuddIn Khan and anr.

Court: Karnataka

V. Jagannathan, J.1. The circumstances under which this appeal has been preferred by the insurance company shocks the conscience of this court.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant, Mr. A.M. Venkatesh, submitted at the outset that the insurance company is questioning the award of the Commissioner dated 29.12.2001 by which award compensation of Rs. 2,44,620 has been granted to the respondent No. 1 herein and the submission of the learned Counsel is that the very same claimant was granted an order earlier on 14.2.2000 wherein the Commissioner had awarded a sum of Rs. 2,41,992 as compensation. Thus, there is a clear case of fraud played by respondent No. 1 on the insurance company and unfortunately the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation also did not take note of the fact that the respondent had earlier taken the benefit of the award passed on 14.2.2000. Therefore, by referring to both awards which have been annexed to this appeal, learned Counsel submitted that the impugned award date...

Group CaptaIn L.G.i. Subramanian S/O Late Sri. L.A. Gangadhara Iyer Vs ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2007(1)Kar96; ILR2007(1)KarSN13; 2007(2)KLJ630

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. The petitioner was commissioned in the Indian Air Force on 31.12.1958. After 25 years of service in various assignments, he was promoted as Group Captain. He was selected for deputation from the Air Force to Hindustan Aeronautics Limited for two years. After completion of the period of deputation he was offered permanent absorption - which he accepted with effect from 21.5.1986. The petitioner's premature retirement on permanent absorption was communicated by an order dated 27.5.1986. It is contended that the Government of India, Ministry of Defence by letter dated 19.12.1986 stated that for the purpose of pensionary benefits, the petitioner would be governed by the provisions of the Departments letter dated 17.3.1986. The said letter indicated that premature retirement would not entail forfeiture of service for the purpose of retirement terminal benefits. The letter also did offer an option to receive a lumpsum amount in lieu of monthly pro-rata pension. The...

The Vijaya Bank Ltd., represented by Its Chairman Vs. the Vijaya Bank ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERH.N. Nagamohan Das, J.1. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the award dated 16.10.2001 in CR. No. 224/97 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bangalore (for short the 'Tribunal') holding that circular No. 185/93 as not correct and directing the petitioner - Bank to negotiate with the first respondent-Union.2. Petitioner is a banking institution having its branches all over the Country. There are about twelve thousand employees as on the date of filing the writ petition. Respondents 1 and 2 are Trade Unions representing the workers of the petitioner-Bank. The first respondent - Union was established in the year 1967. The petitioner - Bank was negotiating with the first respondent - Union right from 1967 and resolved all disputes by negotiations and settlement or through conciliation. The second respondent - Union emerged as a majority Union in the check-off method adopted in the year 1977. Fr...

Muneer Ahmed S/O Nazeer Ahmed Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Secret ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(1)AIRKarR417; 2007CriLJ919

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Committee for regularization of unauthorized Occupation, Sidlagatta, dated 12.02.2004, rejecting the application filed by Smt. Rabibabi, wife of late Hussainsab.2. It is the contention of the petitioner that Smt. Rabiabi was unauthorizedly cultivating 04 Acres 28 Guntas of land in Sy. No. 93 of Sorakayalahalli Village, Sidlagatta Taluk. Kolar District. Smt, Rabiabi filed application in Form No. 50 for regularization of unauthorized cultivation in respect of the said land and by resolution dated 29.10.1996, it was resolved by the Committee to regularize the unauthorized cultivation of Smt. Rabiabi, Smt. Rabiabi also filed an application in Form No. 53 and the same was not considered and writ petition was filed by Smt. Rabiabi in W.P. No. 13181/2000 and this Court by order dated 27.11.2000, directed the Tahsildar, Sidlagatta Taluk, to place the application of Smt. Rabiabi in Form No. 53 before...

Branch Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Now Represented by Its ...

Court: Karnataka

V. Jagannathan, J.1. The appellant/ insurance company being aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Bellary awarding compensation in a sum of Rs. 99562/- to the first respondent herein has preferred this appeal. The main ground of attack by Sri N. Krishnaswamy, learned Counsel for the appellant is that the first respondent- driver suffered no injuries at all in the accident in question yet the Commissioner has awarded the compensation as above and hence this appeal.2. Elaborating his submissions, learned Counsel for the appellant referring to the FIR lodged by the first respondent himself submitted that it is the specific case of the first respondent that the coolies who were in the vehicle in question were all injured in the accident that took place on 19.9.1998 and the first respondent was not at all injured in the accident. Such being the contents of the FIR given by the respondent himself, it is rather difficult to believe the case of the responde...

S. Somashekar Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited and ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006(4)KarSN32; 2007(2)KarLJ118; 2007(1)AIRKarR176

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner, assailing the correctness of Annexure-E, dated 21-12-2001 passed by Executive Engineer and Annexures-H and J passed by Assistant Executive Engineer, dated 7-9-2004 and 8-12-2004 respectively, holding that the petitioner is not liable to pay any amount towards audit short claim, has presented this writ petition. Further, petitioner has sought to direct the respondents to reimburse the 50% of the total audit short claim deposited by the petitioner amounting to Rs. 21,341.25 paise along with interest and also to direct the respondents to reconnect the electrical supply to Meter No. 182.2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that, he has constructed a theater after obtaining necessary permission from the Competent Authority and after obtaining electricity connection through Meter bearing No. KP. 182 for the purpose of construction of the theatre on his land and for drawing drinking water from the bore-well situated adjacent to the ...

J. Ramaraj Vs. Iliyaz Khan

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: IV(2007)BC175; 2007(4)KarLJ489; 2007(1)AIRKarR91; 2007CriLJ902.

ORDERH.V.G. Ramesh, J.1. These three revisions have been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Prl. Sessions Judge, Kolar in Crl. A. Nos. 99/03, 98/03 and 100/03 wherein the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeals while confirming the order of the learned Magistrate in convicting and sentencing the accused/petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.2. As it transpires from the records, complaint was filed under Section 200 of Cr. P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner herein stating that the complainant/ respondent is a commission agent dealing in supply of potatoes on commission basis wherein the accused/petitioner used to place orders for supply of potatoes, as per the request and requirement, the complainant used to supply potatoes to the accused/ petitioner as and when required. Further, during the month of July and August 2001 the ac...